for me, i'm chris jansing, look who is here, katy tur. >> nice color today. >> matching. >> we got the memo. >> fall. >> thank you very much. it is 11:00 a.m. out west, 2:00 at the white house where sara huckabee sanders is expected to speak with reporters at any minute. her last briefing on monday, that's where she said it was not the time to talk about gun control. will she have a different answer today? >> president trump also avoided having the debate this week, but it is not going away. this digital "time magazine" cover asks the question will the las vegas shooting change the debate over guns? on capitol hill the answer is maybe. some republicans are signaling they may be open to banning a gun modification used by stephen

paddock to carry out the mass shooting. in las vegas paddock's motive remains unclear, but we're learning more about paddock's plan and what he did in the days leading up to the shooting. >> what we know is stephen paddock is a man who spent decades acquiring weapons and ammo and living a secret life, much of which will never be fully stood. >> you have to make the assumption he had to have some help at some point. >> new information on what paddock's girlfriend is saying to investigators. >> her attorney reading her statement. >> i knew stephen paddock as a kind, caring, quiet man. >> investigators are grateful for her cooperation, but they will have many more questions. >> multiple senior law enforcement officials have told nbc he researched other locations in boston and chicago. >> nbc news has new details on exactly what paddock researched in those other cities. let's get right to our reporters for the latest on the

investigation and what is happening on capitol hill. nbc news justice correspondent pete williams is in our d.c. bureau where he has been following this investigation from the very beginning. pete, what can you tell us about the other cities that paddock was looking into? >> so first of all, how we know this is correct, what we're told is that the authorities got on to this by looking through the electronic devices that they have found in his homes, in his car, in the hotel room, and looking at his communication history and his internet browsing and what they find is that he researched outdoor summer concerts, outdoor music festivals in chicago, at grant park, and in boston at fenway park, and in chicago he went so far as so actually reserve rooms during what is called the lollapalooza, the summer music festival in chicago while the festival was on. although he reserved the rooms,

he never actually showed up. and we have not gotten any indication that he actually reserved any rooms in boston. but what this says is that he was at least interested in outdoor music festivals for several months before the las vegas shooting. does that mean he was planning to attack crowds before las vegas? possibly investigators say. it's just part of what they're learning as they starting to back and try to fill in a timeline here. >> yeah. >> and it's the closest thing we've come to anything indicating that he had considered something like this before las vegas. >> what about the other things that investigators are learning, specifically that he bought three-quarters of his guns, 33 of his guns, in the last year alone? >> yeah, 70% of them, actually. so he has bought guns since -- well, for 35 years, in all the various places he has lived, texas, california, nevada, crossed over the state line,

mesquite is right up against the state line, went over into utah a couple of times and bought some guns, but the acceleration, it's the pace of the gun buying in just the past year. so 33 of these weapons, mostly rifles, he bought in the last year. so the question is what happened in september or october of 2016 that caused this sudden shift? was it that he had a lot more money sitting around the house and he wanted to protect it because he was winning a lot of money, millions of dollars in gambling? or was there something else in his life that was a precipitating event? so far what officials say is they haven't found anything. they have found some health issues, some mental health issues, but nothing serious or profound enough they believe that would cause someone to want to commit mass murder and think about it apparently for months at a time. >> what about an escape plan? >> i just don't know what that is. the officials i've talked to are familiar with what the sheriff said. there are apparently a lot of

little things that indicate he was thinking about other things after the las vegas shooting, but i don't know of anyone who knows about an escape plan or that he had any real serious thoughts that he would survive this. >> justice correspondent pete williams in our d.c. bureau. thank you very much. and nbc's stephanie gosk is in las vegas. we're getting a detailed timeline from authorities. can you walk us through what we have? >> reporter: sure, katy. an hour and 15 minutes, that's what authorities say that's how long it took from the first shot fired by paddock to the moment at the busted in that door and actually found him shot in the head in that hotel room. let's go through in a detailed way the bullet points of that timeline. so 10:05 on sunday night the first shots are fired by paddock. 10:12 the first officers arrive on the 31st floor of the mandalay bay. 10:15 the final shots are fired by paddock. think about that for just a

second. he was firing for ten minutes, that had to have seemed like an absolute eternitiy for those terrified people on the ground. moving on, 10:17, the first officers arrive on the 32nd floor and then this, at 1018 tank hay juijesus compost goes door, miraculously only shot once in the leg. he is able to go to the authorities, tell them where paddock is. 11:20 the officers breach that door and that's where they find him shot in the head. >> amazing it took so much time between the officer getting there and them getting into that room firing more than 200 shots at that door. are we getting any more information from officers on what it was like as they tried to breach that room? >> reporter: well, you can only imagine from that point on when they were sure they had the room, and obviously the firing

had stopped out into the crowd, but there was still activity, they didn't know whether he had explosives, there were concerns for their own safety. coming up with a plan, they didn't know whether he was alive or not inside, you can imagine it was very difficult and extraordinarily dangerous, but ultimately they were able to breach that door and go inside. also we found out some details not just about the guns that they found in that room, but also what was found in his vehicle outside. in the trunk of his vehicle they found 1600 rounds and ammonium nitrate, that's fertilizer but it's also used in explosives, authorities pointing out that at both of his properties he didn't have any grass, clearly they were concerned that he was going to make some kind of explosive device with that stuff. katy. >> nbc's stephanie fwosgosk in vegas. after every mass shooting this time it may be different,

at least partially. yesterday senator dianne feinstein introduced a bill that would ban the creation, sale and possession of bump fire stocks. a few republicans indicated they are open to the idea but how far will the bill actually get? this morning house speaker paul ryan said this, in an interview with msnbc's hugh hewitt. >> john cornyn has said he wants to have a hearing on bump stocks. are you open to a vote on bump stocks. >> i didn't even know what they were until this week and i'm an avid sportsman, i think we're quickly coming up to speed with what this is. fully automatic weapons have been banned for a long time, apparently this allows you to take a semi-automatic turn it into a fulliment a tick. this is something we need to look into. >> kasie hunt is on capitol hill. what is the likelihood that a hunt like this actually becomes

law? >> reporter: hi, katy. there's still a lot of twists and turns ahead of this. you're right that the tone and tenor of the debate around bump stocks specifically has been different than what we've seen in the past. you have some republicans coming out and saying, hey, i had no idea what this was, as paul ryan said, he is not the only one, and expressing some willingness to potentially make a change, but i will say the legislative process around this still potentially problematic. i want to show you a little bit of what we've heard from senators over the course of the last day or so and then we will talk about it. >> this strikes me as something worth considering and particularly when you look at the video of this individual, spraying gunfire at a high rate on these 22,000 people from this 32nd floor hotel room, i think it's worth our serious consideration. >> do you support a ban on bump

stocks? there has been talk about whether or not to ban them that were used in the shooting in las vegas. >> we will look at it, i think it's premature to make any decision. i think we are all learning more about bump stocks. >> i don't think that the 80 or 90 million americans who exercise their second amendment rights to own a gun should be punished for the act of one evil person. >> reporter: and one additional note, katy, certainly shelly mark capita just walked by this location. our producer talked to her and she said she might be open to something like this, that's remarkable from somebody from west virginia, a very trump heavy voting state. here is my one caveat on this, and it's a major one, any legislation related to guns, legislation takes a long time, period, and the longer something like this takes the more likely it is that it gets chewed apart and potentially changed.

there is an effort on the house side to get the atf to look at this and to declare that these bump stocks are illegal, they think that will be a faster way, i think that is a politically more tenable way than to wind this through congress. >> kasie hunt on capitol hill, thank you very much. and senator chris murphy a democrat from connecticut joins us now, his district includes new town where 20 children and six adults were killed in the sandy hook shooting in 2012, he is also a co-sponsor of senator feinstein's bill. i know bump stocks are a part of the issue but they are not the whole issue. i want to talk about the polling that we have in this country on guns and just how many people have guns. there are according to polls are -- or stats 265 million guns in the u.s., 30% of the population owns them, 3% of the population has more than half of america's guns. not only that, a quinnipiac poll taken in june 2017 shows that

94% support background checks, 93% of republicans support background checks. 57% of people say that guns are too easy to buy. only 35% agree with the nra's argument that more guns will make america safer. the bump stocks is only part of it, it's clear that americans support some form of tighter gun laws. why don't we have them? >> there's really no other issue like this and you laid out the case pretty well. you've got 90% of the american public that supports, you know, probably the most important intervention which is universal background checks, we know it works in states that have universal background checks the rate of gun crime and gun homicide is much lower and yet congress can't move. the answer is pretty simple, the gun lobby which lobbies ard against universal background checks is much stronger right now than the anti-gun violent

lobby. they have had 30 years to build up political power that's especially potent in republican districts and we are playing catch up. i view this as a long-term social change movement not unlike some of the other big ones that have played out over history. we will win but we have to get as strong as they are, we have to defeat members of congress that are voting against 90% of their constituents. we won't inn with this inside washington, we will win this outside of. >> senator, the "washington post" has been tracking how much the nra donates to all members of congress, they have a full list of what money has gone to whom. paul ryan has received almost $40,000, mitch mcconnell $26,000, kasie hunt was just on with us a moment ago saying the longer any of this legislation takes even on bump stocks which seems to be supported by a lot of folks in congress right now, republicans alike, the longer it takes the harder it is to get things done. how do you intend to keep the pressure on? and i ask this because you've

been talking about this now for years after new town, you bring it up a lot, and it only gets spoken about when there are these mass shootings. how do you keep it as part of the conversation a week from now? a month from now? a year from now? >> the number that you used for the donations that go to those numbers they are actually pretty small in the scope of how much money people like paul ryan raise, the problem is the nra has managed to make their stamp of approval a proxy for a broader set of conservative credentials. so if republicans want to show how conservative they are in their district they want that nra stamp of approval. we have to help republicans show that they are conservative if that's what they need to get elected without having to be 100% in compliance with the nra's agenda. how we keep it in front of the public, we go around washington. in 2016 we had four referendums on the ballot to tighten gun laws, one of them in nevada and three of those referendums won.

so we are going to do that again in 2018 and 2020, keep these ballot measures moving so that we ultimately might be able to go around the stagnation and the nra power here in washington. >> senator, the nra has just released a statement unfortunately the first responders -- the first response from some politicians has been a call for more gun control, banning guns from law abiding americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks, this is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. they then go on to say that in order to keep americans safe and on behalf of our 5 million members across the country we urge congress to pass national right to carry reciprocity which will allow law abiding americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence. it sounds like what they're doing is going back to the argument that they made after new town which was more folks with guns will protect crazy people that have guns. >> right.

>> protect you from crazy people that have guns. >> yeah, so that statement is a complete fabrication from beginning to end. we have reams of research on what laws work and what laws don't and what we know is that states that have stricter guns laws making sure that dangerous people don't get weapons and people don't get dangerous weapons have lower rates of crime. what we know is if you have a go u.n. in your home this is more likely to be used to dill you than kill an intruder. there are people who had firearms at places like las vegas and dallas and they were helpless because they had shooters with semi-automatic and now we know automatic weapons up above them firing down. it's all mythology from beginning to end, it's about a political agenda that the nra advances in order to help the gun industry, their patrons, and we have to do a better job of explaining that to people. >> remember, 3% of the population has more than half of america's guns. 3% of the population. senator chris murphy of connecticut.

senator, thank you very much for joining us. >> thanks. and you know those rumors you've been hearing about democrats worried about their leadership being ineffective, potentially toxic in the house? well, those rumors are true, there is some concern at least among some in the caucus. today there is a renewed call for democratic leader in the house nancy pelosi to step aside. so the next generation of democrats can step up. the "washington post" is reporting congresswoman linda sanchez of california the fifth highest ranking democrat in the house thinks it's time for a change and not just with pelosi. she wants house minority whip steny hoyer and james clyburn to step down, too. congressman joe crowley is a democrat from new york and as chairman of the democratic caucus he is the fourth highest person in the democratic leadership. congressman, thank you very much for joining us. >> thanks, katy. >> what is your reaction to congresswoman sanchez? >> well, first of all, i think

nancy pelosi, steny hoyer and jim clyburn are some of the hardest and smartest working members of our democratic leadership and our caucus. what i'm focused on right now, katy, is the fact that we're dealing with a crisis in puerto rico and the virgin islands, we have had a massacre of incredible scale in las vegas and today we had a budget pass that i don't believe is refle reflective of the values of the democratic party nor the american people. those are things that need to be folks used on right now. >> sanchez is your deputy chair, have you spoken to her about these comments? >> i think what we ought to be focused on are the issues that i spoke about just now. i think that linda sanchez is a valued member of our democratic leadership and caucus but i do believe right now is not the time to have this discussion. >> sanchez came out and made this discussion part of -- made this part of the discussion. she brought it up today. so why would somebody in the democratic leadership make these comments calling nancy pelosi and the leaders after pelosi was

able to at the very least cut a deal with president trump on funding when it came to the hurricane disaster? >> right. well, what i would say, katy, is our caucus made its decision last november when we held a raucous caucus and debated these issues and we were elected to the house leadership. i don't believe that right now is the time to be having this discussion. we need to stay focused on the issues at hand and i went through the litany just a few -- we are not focusing on economics and job growth in this country under this republican controlled congress. 250 plus days of do nothing, do absolutely nothing when people are dying in this country either through natural disasters or man made disasters like we saw happen in vaccinatiegas this we >> the democrats want to retake the house and senate in 2018. nancy pelosi is a lightning rod, the republicans use her pretty

effectively to rally support among their voters to get them to vote for republican lawmakers. are you concerned that she will be a liability for 2018 when democrats could have a real opening to retake both houses of congress? at least one of them. >> you know, katy, i have heard that argument used so many times before and i think it really reflects the sexism that still exists in politics today. i think nancy pelosi is held to a different standard than others are. the vilification of her in a very sexist way quite frankly is what's led to this discussion. what i think nancy pelosi as i said before is one of the smartest and hardest working members of our caucus and what we need to be doing right now is focusing on the issues that will advance the cause of the american people and i think it will also lead the american people to believe and understand the democrats should be in control of the house of representatives. >> congresswoman pelosi and steny hoyer have released statements both of which saying that they are focused on winning back the house, anything else

right now is a distraction. one last question for you, congressman. if she does step down, say she does, would you be considering taking her place? >> look, i've never shied away from my ambition some day to advance in the house leadership. what i will suggest is that is an issue for the entire caucus to take up at some point. now is not the time to have that discussion, probably after the elections in november of 2018. >> new york congressman joe crowley, thank you very much for joining us. and sara huckabee sanders has taken the podium in the white house press briefing room. let us take a lesson. >> after being shot thomas drug himself behind a row of bleachers and began worrying that he may bleed out, two women rushed to his side, one tied a belt around his leg and others carried to to safety. when the president and the first lady walked into his room at the hospital he endured the pain and rose to his feet. when asked why he did it thomas

said i will never lie down when the president of this great country comes to shake my hand. the las vegas strong hashtag that has swept across social media in recent days could not be more fitting. looking ahead to tomorrow, the vice president will be traveling to florida, the u.s. virgin islands and puerto rico. he will meet with survivors, local officials and first responders and personally assess the massive recovery efforts. the federal government continues to provide much needed personnel and supplies to puerto rico and the u.s. virgin islands. puerto rico's governor recently said the president and the administration every time we've asked them to execute they've executed quickly. that has been and will continue to be our goal. this unprecedented relief effort should make it very clear we will not rest or stop until all of our people are safe, secure and set on a clear path forward building the very bright future they deserve. and what that i will take your questions. jill. >> i have two topics for you, i want to start off with does the

president support legislation that would ban or regulate bump stocks? >> right now our focus as we've said over the last couple of days has been on healing and uniting the country. the investigation still continues to be in very early stages. we know that both -- members of both parties in multiple organizations are planning to take a look at bump stocks and related deaf slices, we certainly welcome that, would like to be part of that conversation. and we would like to see a clear understanding of the facts and we would like to see input from the victims' families, from law enforcement, from policymakers and we are expecting hearings and other important fact-finding efforts on that and a we want to be part of that discussion and are certainly open to that moving forward. >> i think we're certainly open to that moving forward but we want to be part of that conversation as it takes place in the coming days and weeks. >> i want to ask you about daca today, obviously it is the deadline. is there any thinking about

extending that deadline? >> i will keep you posted on any announce its on that front. right now the president's position has been that he has called on congress to come up with a permanent solution and a fix to this process to have responsible immigration reform and we would like to see that be a part of it. maggie. >> asking for cuts in the levels of legal immigration going to be part in what the white house seeks in the daca fix? >> we will roll out the specific prime ministers we would like to see in that responsible immigration reform very soon, probably in the very short future and we will let you know when we do that and you can see all the details on that day when it's there. >> lou. >> there are a couple questions on puerto rico, if i can. the president said that the debt in puerto rico will be wiped out, director mulvaney sort of cleared that up a little bit saying he wasn't -- we shouldn't take the president word-for-word on that. can you just button it down from the podium whether or not the president will take action or

push for legislation to forgive any of the debt that puerto rico currently has? >> right now the primary focus is to provide relief to puerto rico and support in the rebuilding effort. while we are still dealing with the immediate disaster it isn't no ept to focus on the difficulties that puerto rico was dealing with before the storm. there is a process for how to deal with puerto rico's debt and it will have to go through that process to have a lasting recovery and growth. this was a process that was put in place and set up under obama and that has a board of advisers that deals with that debt and it will go through that process as we move forward. matthew. sorry, i'm going to try to jump around. matthew. >> inks that, share rachlt i'm wondering if there's any concern in the white house that the president's frequent use of the term fake news to describe mainstream outlets muddees the water a little bit and makes it harder for citizens to identify the actual fake news that the intelligence agencies have said

countries like russia used to interfere with the last election. >> i think that the president has a great frustration with the fact that a lot of times you have inaccurate information that's being presented as factual. a lot of times you have opinions that are being presented as news and they are not. and i think that that is a real person and something that certainly should be looked at. >> the distinction between erroneous reports or reporting that he finds offensive and the type of fake news that we saw pushed during the election by russian intelligence, do you see a distinction there? >> we see a problem with any stories that are inaccurate or untruthful being presented to the american people as facts. >> can you give us a read out [ inaudible question ] >> i am sorry. >> can you give us a read out on the meeting with senator cotton. >> the president routinely meets with senators and house members and this wasn't anything beyond that. they talked about a number of issues, obviously senator cotton has been somebody the president

has worked with regularly since taking office. we are going to continue to do that. if we have further information we will let you know. major. >> [ inaudible question ] >> i think both of those topics were discussed. >> beyond bump stocks the president -- as open an attitude about other methods of gun control that have long been debated or is the white house openness which you just described being willing to be a part of that conversation limited to one on bump stocks? >> the president is a strong supporter of the second amendment, that hasn't changed. this is a president who wants to look at -- i think at this point in the process i think we all need to take a step back. we had one of the most horrific tragedies that's ever taken place on u.s. soil and before we can run out and start talking about the preventions for something like that to happen again, which we all certainly want to do, we have to determine what caused it. we haven't gotten that far down the road, that's something that law enforcement agencies are all

collaboratively working day in, day out to do. we want to help support that effort in any way possible and, again, i think that this administration's position is extremely clear. we would look at taking any step we could to prevent something like this from happening again. >> a bump stock is what you're open to having a conversation about and that's it for the moment? >> that's something we're certainly open to having that conversation. at this point, again, i don't think that we want to go out and start having -- and making rash decisions while we are still in an open investigation. we'd like to get more facts about what we can do. not just in this case, but this is a president who is very committed to doing every single thing he can every single day to protect american lives, whether that's securing the border, whether that's defeating isis, whether that's containing north korea and whether that's looking at legislative fixes that may be necessary to help protect american lives, that's something that the president and the

administration are committed to doing and looking at and being part of that conversation every single day moving forward. kevin. >> thanks. i a lot of people talk about the bump stocks, i want to talk about something else and that's the iran nuclear deal. october 15th deadline coming up. i want to make it clear for the people that don't know it's a little more complicated because there is also the review act that congress enacted last year. so i'm just curious given that the president has previously said this deal was an embarrassment, does it make sense, then, to presume that he will not choose to recertify or might he decide to strengthen sanctions and sort of stay in the deal that way? >> the president has, as he said, made a decision on this and he will make that announcement at the appropriate time. the main focus that he has had has been a comprehensive strategy on how to deal with iran, that is what he wanted his team to put in place and i think you will see that announced in short order and that will be a

comprehensive strategy with a unified team behind him supporting that effort. >> different voices i'm imagining in the room on that, given that they will move forward as one there has been some debate, is it fair to say that? >> the president's team has presented a united strategy that the national security team all stands behind and supports and the president will make that announcement soon. john. >> the nra has put out a statement as it relates to bump stocks, their position on bump stocks, they write that they believe that devices that allow semi-automatic rifles to function as fully automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulation. does that change the administration's point of view after all the president has been a big supporter of the nra and the nra has also been a big supporter of the president? >> look, as i said just a few minutes ago we welcome certainly that and a conversation on that. that hasn't changed. something we're very open to

and, again, with he want to be part of the conversation on that moving forward. blake. >> let me ask you one on puerto rico and then one on taxes if you don't mind. going back to puerto rico you said that with the debt that there is a process in place and that the process will play out. does that mean the president's comments of just simply wiping away the debt is no longer on the table? >> the president wants that to go through that process and that's the stage we are in. >> and on tax reform, chuck schumer now or at least is scheduled to have a news conference about the state and local tax deductions being wiped off the books, how they should stay on the books. there is currently one republican senator, seven republicans at least in the house who want that to stay as a part of the tax framework. the president had talked about red line, is he up for negotiation on salt or is this something for him that is a red line? >> look, the president has laid out his priorities and the framework of what he wants to see in this tax relief package.

look, i think one of the big things you have to look at is that most americans don't actually itemize deductions, 80% of the benefit goes to six figure tax filers. the fact is that it isn't fair and doesn't make sense for working americans across the country to subsidize the very wealthy in a few states. the president has been clear about his position and we're moving forward with the framework that we've laid out. jeff. >> follow-up question on puerto rico. yesterday the administration in its supplemental request asked for $13 million to help storm victims. will some of that go towards helping puerto rico rebuild its power grid which was in pretty dire straits before this storm? >> there was a large portion of that that will go to fema's disaster relief fund and that will be determined at the appropriate time which parts of those will go to which effort and so i direct you to fema on the specifics of what that would look like. jim. >> why did the president tweet this morning that he would like to see the senate intelligence

committee investigate news outlets and i guess this quest to go after fake news? does he -- does he value the first amendment as much as he values the second amendment? >> absolutely. the president is an incredible advocate of the first amendment, but with the first amendment -- hold on. i allowed you to finnish -- with the first amendment with those freedoms also come responsibilities and you have a responsibility to tell the truth, to be accurate. i think right now when we've seen recent information that says that only 5% of media coverage has been positive about this president and this administration, while at the same time you have the stock market and economic confidence at an all time high, isis is on the run, unemployment is at the lowest it's been in 17 years, we've cut regulations at a historic pace, we're fixing the va for our vets, you've only found 5% of our time to focus on

some of those big issues and those are the issues most americans care about. not a lot of the things that you cover, no the a lot of the petty palace intrigue that you spend your time on, i think that we need to move forwards a certainly more fair, more accurate and frankly a more responsible news media for the american people. >> if i can follow up on that -- >> sorry, i'm going to try to get to everybody and like i told your colleague if i have time -- >> we quickly, though, should congress investigate [ inaudible ]. >> no. >> governor brown in california just signed a sanctuary state statute and i'm interested in what efforts the administration will make to block the move, and whether this signifies that the administration efforts to crack down on sanctuary jurisdictions has failed given that california has more than 12% of the nation's population and it will now be an entire state under the sanctuary designation. >> look, we are spending every

day we can trying to find the best way forward. the president will be laying out his responsible immigration plan over the next week and i hope that california will push back on their governor's, i think, irresponsible decision moving forward. >> my second question was a follow-up to -- >> hold on. i'm going to try to get to everybody. >> sara, thank you. was the president upset that his secretary of state didn't deny calling him a moron in his public remarks yesterday? >> look, as the secretary of state said, this is a petty ridiculous accusation and frankly i think it's beneath the secretary of state to weigh in on every rumor out there. his spokesperson, however, did come out and clarified that the secretary of state has never used those words. >> what is your response to those who say the president has undercut the secretary of state? just quickly. >> i think that the premise of that question is absolutely ridiculous, the president can't

undercut his own cabinet, the president is the leader of the cabinet, he sets the town, he sets the agenda and i think that question makes no sense because of that. >> thank you, sara. two questions. first, let me follow up on kevin's question earlier about the iran agreement. we know that this certify does not mean a complete cut and it would still keep the u.s. in the negotiating procedure. on the other hand, a clean break such as that advocated by former ambassador john bolton would completely separate the u.s. from any agreement with iran. ambassador bolton opposed that, reportedly has been unable to talk to the president about it. is the clean break advocated by him still on the table? >> as i told kevin, the president is going to make an announcement about the decision that he has made on a comprehensive strategy that his

team supports and we will do that in the coming days. i'm not going to get ahead of that announcement. >> john, i'm going to try to get to everybody. i will come back. >> i had two. >> i know. everybody -- everybody has two. if that's the case that we're setting somebody can say i have 12 questions on the front end. david. >> just one for you, we now know that secretary price was essentially let go for his private jet travel and we know that in close proximity to his firing secretary perry took private jets, we know that kellyanne conway went for one of secretary price's rides. at the same time the president has spent i think 17 weekends at at the cost of $180,000 an hour for air force one and is going to take the plane to north carolina this weekend. is he not setting the tone that tells his cabinet members that this kind of misuse of taxpayer

money or overuse is okay. >> i will start with north carolina. my understanding is that for political event that that will be reimbursed for any political travel. the president -- >> the first class rate that secretary price paid? >> i would have to check on that. the president is in a certainly very different position. he is not allowed to travel in a different way other than in a secure airplane as air force one. >> he can stay here and work like the former president. >> the president certainly hasn't been there every weekend and every weekend that he's traveling no matter where he is the president is working, he has hosted foreign leaders on several of those trips which have led to great accomplishments, they've led to putting unprecedented pressure on north korea in large part because of the relationship development that's taking place at some of those weekends that you are attacking for. this is a president that is committed to helping move his agenda forward and certainly i think that those weekends have been very successful in doing that. alex. >> i want to ask about the president's tweet this morning

about the senate intelligence committee. is he frustrated with how long the investigation into alleged russian election interference is taking? >> i think more important than the president being frustrated i think the american people are frustrated. the senate intel committee told us yesterday that after nearly nine months of investigation that's included more than 100 interviews over more than 250 hours, 4,000 pages of transcripts, 100,000 pages of documents, interviewing officials in the intelligence community who wrote the report on russian election meddling, interviewing relevant obama administration officials and talking to every trump campaign official they have requested it's literally found zero evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and russia. i think that the american people would like them to focus on some other things. i know that we certainly have said this all along and we're glad that as they continue this process they're coming to the same conclusion. >> on the kurdish vote last week i'm wondering the u.s.

commanders have regularly praised the peshmerga for their ability to fight isis. what message is the white house and u.s. government sending to them now by not backing them in their desire for independence? >> look, we've been clear and consistent on that, it hasn't changed and we are not going to weigh in any further than we already have. trey. >> sara, does president trump believe the senate intelligence committee should investigate american media organizations? >> i don't know that that's the case, but i do think that we should call on all media to a higher standard and certainly i think i weighed in very clearly what our position is when jim asked the question earlier. >> -- intelligence committee looking into the fake news networks in our country? >> i think that you have a lot of responsibility and a lot of times false narratives create a bad environment, certainly aren't helpful to the american people and you have a responsibility to provide and

report fair and accurate details and when we don't that's, i think, troubling for all of us. >> sara, you said several times that the white house wants to be part of the conversation on bump stocks, the president said himself this week we will be talking about gun laws as time goes by, but you also suggested, i think, that the time to talk about that is after the investigation has gotten to another stage or wrapped up? if not now, when is it appropriate to start having a conversation about policies? >> i haven't said that the investigation has to be fully complete before conversations can take place, but i think we have to be careful that before we go out and try to talk about things that prevented something, we need to know what caused it in the first place and we are not there yet. we are still in that process. we certainly want to, again, look at every way that we could prevent anything even remotely close to this from ever happening again and we want to be part of that process and we hope to. >> if i could just ask one question to clarify the white house haes position.

this morning in a couple television interviews kellyanne conway suggested that the atf in 2010 made a decision that these bump stocks were firearms parts and not firearms themselves and couldn't be regulated under the existing law. is it the white house's view that that was the wrong decision on the part of the atf? >> i'm not aware of kellyanne's comments, i would have to look at that before i weighed in, i would want to have all the information in front of me before i could answer that. but again i think the bigger point here we're open to having that conversation, we think that we should have that conversation and we want to be part of it moving forward. >> sara, i have two las vegas questions. one, is the administration considering overriding the 2010 obama atf ruling on bump stocks? >> like i just said, i think that's something that we should look at. we're very open to it and we want to have that conversation and move forward in the process. >> and second the congresswoman

from las vegas said she personally delivered a letter to the member of the white house staff yesterday inviting the president to meet with the gun violence task force. did the presidency it? is he going to say yes? >> i'm not sure if he saw the letter but i think we would certainly be open to having a meeting with a number of different organizations and people that would be involved in this process. >> do you know if he got the letter? >> again, i would have to check before i could comment. >> sara, has the president had even preliminary conversations with congressional leaders about bump stocks and did he talk with any of the rescuers in las vegas about these devices. >> i know the conversation came up in the very early stages with some of the members that were traveling yesterday, but nothing definitive, again, opening up that conversation and like i've said several times today, that's a discussion that we welcome and that we want to be a part of. april. >> over the last couple days the president has used the words

fear, hate, you're talking, having conversations on different things. what is the conversation when it comes to the issue of [ inaudible ] -- you have not talked about it yet, you have not classified it as such. talking to people from both sides of the aisle they're saying there is no one settled universal definition for terrorism but we have seen timothy mcvay with oklahoma city, we've seen roof with mother emanuel in charleston. i mean, under all circumstances that we've seen so far, people were intimidated, scared, ambushed, military style in a planned thought out effort, whether political or not, they were terrorized. is this administration willing to start having conversations about other things, was this terror, domestic terror? >> i think that's something for the law enforcement communities to define and identified. i think the bigger thing that this administration certainly

has been focused on is the prevention and looking at how we can stop things like this from ever happening again. i don't care how you label it, it's something that should never take place in this country and this president is committed to looking for ways to prevent it. >> hallie. >> what about -- >> sorry, i've limited everybody to one question today. >> what does this white house believe the president went there, it was very controversial -- >> actually it wasn't controversial, it was actually widely praised by a democrat governor. i think that it is sad that the mayor of san juan chose to make that a political statement instead of a time of focusing on the relief effort. the president invited her to be part of that conversation, he specifically asked in the meeting where many were present including a couple dozen other mayors who were very happy with the recovery effort, the governor, the congresswoman, he opened the floor up for discussion and she actually made zero comments.

to me that would have been the time and the place that she should have weighed in and asked for what she needed and laid out what she was asking for for san juan. she didn't. instead she chose to wait until the president left and then criticize him on tv which i think is the wrong thing for her to do for her constituents and i hope next time she's begin the opportunity to help her constituents she will take it, hallie. >> you've made it clear that the president is open to conversations surrounding bump stocks and perhaps other regulations on gun control. does he want to lead that conversation? will he get out and use his powers and presidential platform to push for more regulation on, for example, bump stocks? law enforcement officials have said were used in vegas. >> i think right now the position of the president has been to lead on the effort of uniting our country. we have had a country in mourning and i think we saw what kind of leader this president wants to be by what he did yesterday. he went in, he met with the law enforcement officials, he met with the medical teams, he met with the survivors of that horrific tragedy.

obviously this president wants to be a leader, i think he's demonstrated that, i think he will continue to do that in this process. if you want me to get down into the weeds on specific policy i don't think we're there yet. right now we want to lead the effort on bringing our country together and offering comfort to those that have been hurt over the last several days. mike. >> i'm going to take this last one. >> some talk that some of the main facilitators of the iran nuclear deal are significant tenders for the nobel peace prize. is the white house aware of that and do you have a thought on these folks being talked about as potential winners? >> i'm not sure about the nobel peace prize process, certainly not as it pertains to that but i think we've been very clear what our position is on the deal. that hasn't changed just because some people may receive an award for it. thanks so much, guys, have a good day. >> sara huckabee sanders there ending her daily news briefing. hallie jackson is getting wired up, we will talk about whether

the white house believes there should be new legislation into bump stocks, what the shooter in las vegas used in order to fire his semi-automatic weapons mostly like an automatic weapon. hallie jackson is in the white house briefing room and here in our newsroom is "new york times" reporter political reporter nick confessore. hallie, run us through the highlights of that briefing right there. >> reporter: yeah, because there were a couple. a lot of the questions focused obviously on what is happening just down pennsylvania avenue from where we are and that is the conversation surrounding regulation or banning of bump stocks, as you have been talking about, these devices that the shooter in las vegas used to allow a settlement automatic weapon to fire faster similar to an automatic. sara huckabee sanders made some news here. it was about 45 seconds after that nra statement came out indicating that the nra would be open to a review by the atf of bump stocks, should be noted

that the atf has already determined that those bump stocks are legal because they are not actually a weapon they are simply a part of a firearm in and of themselves, this plastic or plastic device essentially. sara sanders made news when she said that the president would be open to that conversation. she repeated that several times and i want to play you a little bit of what else she had to say. listen. >> does the president support legislation that would ban or regulate bump stocks? >> right now our focus, as we've said over the last couple of days, has been on healing and uniting the country. the investigation still continues to be in very early stages. we know that both -- members of both parties in multiple organizations are planning to take a look at bump stocks and related devices. we certainly welcome that. would like to be part of that conversation and we would like to see a clear understanding of the facts and we would like to see input from the victims' families, from law enforcement, from policymakers and we are expecting hearings and other important fact-finding efforts

on that and we want to be part of that discussion. we're certainly open to that moving forward. >> he has put out a statement as it relates to bump stocks, their position on bump stocks, they write that they believe that fo. -- does that change the administration's point of view? after all the president has been a big supporter of the nra and the nra has been a big supporter of the president. >> look, like i said a few minutes ago, we welcome that and certainly conversation on that. that hasn't changed. it's something we're very open to and we want to be part of the conversation on that moving forward. >> when i followed up by asking if the president wanted to lead that conversation -- obviously this is a big headline.

the conversation more regulation of bump stocks here in d.c. but there's another conversation happening that is the one surrounding frankly president trump's secretary of state rex tillerson after our nbc news reporting indicating there were obviously some issues tillerson had over the summer according to multiple sources familiar with his thinking. you have heard the pushback from rex tillerson. you heard more pushback today from sarah huckabee sanders when she said that the president, and i don't have the quote directly in front of me, but something along the lines incredible advocate for the first amendment. that statement came hours after the president this morning called on congressional investigators to look into the free press. my colleague dug in more on our reporting with his relationship with secretary tillerson. here she is. >> upset that his secretary of state didn't deny calling him a moron in public remarks yesterday? >> look, as the secretary of

state said, this is a petty, ridiculous accusation and frankly i think it's beneath the secretary of state to weigh in on every rumor out there. his spokesperson however did come out and clarify that the secretary of state has never used those words. john -- >> the president undercut the secretary of state -- >> i think the premise of that question is absolutely ridiculous. the president can't undercut his own cabinet. the president is the leader of the cabinet. he sets the tone, he sets the agenda and i think that question makes no sense because of that. >> notable response from sarah sanders there worth noting discuss the need to focus on policy and not what she described as palace intrigue. obviously affecting policy internationally when it comes to the publicly different opinions you've had on a variety of topics related to the international stage including for example thinking about what happened with qatar and saudi arabia that over the summer other as well.

as you have this deadline coming up next week, october 15th, for the iranian nuclear deal, something the president has already made a decision on but not yet shared publicly. >> the president saying over the weekend it was a waste of his time to talk to little rocket man in north korea. a lot to go through there, hallie jackson, thank you so much. reminder what the president tweeted earlier this morning, why isn't the senate intel committee looking into the fake news networks in our country to see why so much of our news is just made up, fake. those are the questions surrounding whether the president wants to see a senate intel investigation into news networks in this country. sarah huckabee sanders not answering affirmatively on that, but also not answering negatively on that either. nick, let's get back to the portion of that briefing for a moment, the nra statement. they did say they would like the atf to look into this more, a bit of a passoff though. the atf already decided this, this is not then advocating for

legislation. most notable i found at the end of the nra statement was that they are urging congress to pass the national right to carry reciprocity which will allow law-abiding americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence. this is the same argument they made after sandy hook. good guys will guns will defend americans from bad guys with guns. does that apply here? a bad guy in the crowd shooting down on the ground and good guy on the ground could not help without a sniper rifle essentially. >> from the nra's analogy, they're doing what they always do, play the long game. what they want to do is overrule state laws that outlaw conceal to carry and that reciprocity with other states. the bump stock issue is basically a side issue. what the nra is good at is channelling all the focus and energy into relatively small

reforms that can be theater or not but focusing energy on longer term -- >> why do they have so much influence on congress? is it all money? i mean, the majority of americans want to see tighter gun laws, universal background checks or a more limited not guilty ban but limited access to assault rifles. 3% of americans own more than half of the guns in this country. how is it if the polling shows that americans are for tighter gun control, that many people own that many guns, why is it that congress is deadlocked? >> for the same reason hillary clinton could win a popular vote and not be president. people for gun control are in the wrong places. people who oppose it are in the right places. the nra is not primarily powerful because of its money though it has a lot of money. it has single voters in key districts around the country who vote on guns and vote on gun control and believe that they

are in a holy war against regulation. >> so rucker is also with us from "the washington post." the other topic hallie ran through was rex tillerson. >> yeah. >> do you think the president does have confidence in his, what's the word, on the white house right now when it comes to tillerson's fate? >> the president said he has full confidence in rex tillerson, but i got to tell you white house officials say privately that he has a lot of concerns about rex tillerson. he's bothered by tillerson's traditionalist sort of establishment thinking on foreign policy. there's been a series of issues over the last several months here where tillerson has taken a side that the president has overruled. so there's some tension there. there's also lack of personal chemistry. there's tension in these meetings. and it sounds like this is not going to last very long. it seems like the relationship publicly at least has stabilized for the moment, but tillerson at the end of this year may be time

to leave. >> rucker, thank you very much. nick, thank you as well. and hallie jackson as well. moving on, confirmed report of how -- defend against cyber attacks after a national security agency contractor placed that information on his home computer. such a breach could enable russia to evade nsa surveillance and infiltrate u.s. networks more easily. with me one of the "the wall street journal" reporters who broke this story. he joins me along with nbc's ken delanian. gordon, talk to me about the gravity of this hack and what it means for not only 2016 but for the future. >> yeah. it's a significant discovery that they made in 2016 that this contractor had absconded with

material from the nsa campus, put it on his home computer, it was running this software which we now know enabled russian hackers to potentially suck it out of the computer and make copies of it. it's significant because it demonstrates the power of russian hacking in some of -- with some of the america's best kept secrets. these are sources and methods and they show the russians hackers a lot about what can be -- what the u.s. capabilities are. >> and, ken, what's the government doing about it? >> well, they're saying that they're stepping up internal security in nsa, katy, but as you know this was the third major breach at the national security agency, the nation's digital spying agency. my sources are telling me it's particularly devastating because edward snowden leaked a lot of

highly classified information but he didn't leak these kind of hacking tools, the way the nsa steals material from computers, protect networks and eavesdrop on communications. according to the allegations here that's exactly the materials this man brought home and that russian hackers were able to steal. and another source of mine said that this is a really aggressive move by the russians. this is a game on moment, as he put it, to go after a contractor at home. and also, katy, explains why the federal government has cracked down in recent months and essentially banned the software from federal computers. and we saw best buy not too long ago taking that product off their shelves. kaspersky their business in the united states has real problems with this and my source say should be viewed as a hostile actor. >> we also have clint with us. clint, it feels like every day this new revelation of how much farther russia was able to get into our system. >> yeah, i think it's important to note in this case that any

russian corporation or criminal, criminal enterprise in cyberspace can be used, we saw this in april thousands of computers around the world used by russia intelligence to penetrate into people's computers. now we see a company, a cyber security company supposed to be protecting you being used to actually snatch secrets out of someone's home computer. they're able to do this. that makes millions of people around the world vulnerable. and it's a huge strategic asset for the russians. >> guys, thank you very much for joining us to talk about this very serious story. it is 3:00 p.m. here on the east coast. i'm katy tur. we want to keep talking about that press briefing we just watched, but first, some news about something we've been talking about all day. that bump fire stock gun attachment technology that can make semiautomatic guns fire

li